December 11, 2003 radio program: Hovind continues to answer Carl Marychurch?
from Australia at http://www.geocities.com/kenthovind/
(Hovind's side of the story about his arrest. Hovind claims to have a real
Ph.D., and other charges).

December 12, 2003 radio program: Hovind continues to answer Carl Marychurch?
from Australia at http://www.geocities.com/kenthovind/
(Hovind answers the charge of him falsely claiming bankruptcy, dinosaurs
are alive and well today, fake footprint casts from Paluxy, and other charges).

REPLY: Vitamin B17 is also called amygdalin, but more commonly laetrile.
Laetrile does not meet the standards for being a vitamin. It is a compound
of two sugar molecules called an amygdalin. Ernst Krebs labeled it a vitamin.
Laetrile contains 6% cyanide which is extremely toxic. Taking too much laetrile
can be lethal. After extensive testing the National Cancer Institute found
laetrile not to be effective in treating cancer. The Food and Drug Administration
rejected it because of its poisonous cyanide content. For
more information about vitamin B17 click here.

In a recent article (Philadelphia Inquirer Friday June 25, 1999,
C1) the Federal Trade Commission announced a crack down on fraudulent
health products that offer cures for diseases like cancer, aids, and
arthritis on the internet. There is a federal consumer health information
resource at http://www.healthfinder.gov.
The FDA has its own site at http://www.fda.gov.

HOVIND STATEMENT 3. Adam and Eve were vegetarians which is one reason
they lived so long, 900 plus years.

REPLY: There is no evidence that a vegetarian diet will make you
live to be 900 years old. The long years are probably due the different
way the Sumerians counted which was switched to a base 60. How
Old was Noah?

HOVIND STATEMENT 4. ICA stones from Peru show clear drawings of
dinosaurs indicating that man and dinosaurs live together.

REPLY: There are many other Egyptian and Mesopotamian drawings that
can be construed to be some sort of dinosaur, but they are not. They are
clearly labeled what they are. (See the pictures and symbols in the book
Gods, Demons and Symbols of Ancient Mesopotamia by Jeremy Black and
Anthony Green Austin: University of Texas Press, 1992). The evidence indicates
the Ica Stones are frauds. See my web page at on Ica
Stones from Peru.

HOVIND STATEMENT 5. In ancient literature what were called "dragons"
where actually dinosaurs. The way they killed these dragons namely T-Rex
was to pull off their small arm, and let them bleed to death.

REPLY: I would like to see Kent Hovind try to pull the arm off of
a T-Rex.

HOVIND STATEMENT 6. Leviathan mentioned in the Bible is a fire breathing
dragon.

HOVIND STATEMENT 7. Noahs ark probably had a big "moon
hole" in it with 12 anchors to hold it down. Noah was 12 feet tall.
Noahs Ark is located at the Durupinar site in Turkey. Just ask Ron
Wyatt who has the iron rivets.

REPLY: I dont remember God telling Noah to use rivets, but
they must have been better than the ones on the Titanic. Actually, there
is no evidence that Wyatt has found an iron rivet. The Durupinar site in
Turkey is just a geological formation. The smelting and working of iron
was not known until 1400 BC (NIDOTTE Vol.1, 741-2). Answers in Genesis headed
by Ken Ham in there magazine Creation Ex-Nihilo state that Ron Wyatts
claims are false (Creation
14(4):26-38, 1992; Creation 21(2) March-May 1999, 11-14). See
also sites on Wyatt's
Fraud and another
Wyatt report.

HOVIND STATEMENT 8. We should not have any public schools. See www.exodus2000.org
(This link no longer works).

HOVIND STATEMENT 9. Darwin has been disproved at www.darwindisproved.com.

REPLY: You should know that this web site was a hoax. To keep from
looking like a fool, I would remove this immediately from your presentation.

HOVINDS REPLY: He said that someone told him that morning
about www.darwindisproved.com so he put it in his presentation, later that
day he discovered it was a hoax and removed it.

REPLY: I would think you would want to check out a web site before
recommending it to a large audience.

HOVIND STATEMENT 10. A hyperbaric chamber can heal you and grow
giants like before Noahs flood where there was 2 times the oxygen
and pressure. This is confirmed by scientists who studied the air bubbles
in amber (see Time Mag. Nov. 9, 1987 page 82). Dr. Mori in Japan grew a
tomato plant 40 feet high yielding 15,000 tomatoes.

REPLY: A hyperbaric chamber can help heal certain wounds, but it
can not turn you into a giant.

HOVIND STATEMENT 11. The King James Version is the only reliable
translation. The KJV translates "the first day" in Genesis 1:5
and not "day one" or "one day."

REPLY: Hovind needs to look at the Hebrew. The cardinal number "one"
is used as opposed to the ordinal "first" as in the rest of the
chapter. There also is no definite article in the Hebrew. This point was
much discussed in Rabbinic literature. See my
discussion of this in Genesis One.

With the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls we have older and better texts
of the Hebrew which differ from the King James Version. For example, the
alphabetical Psalm 145 has all the letters of the alphabet except "n"
in the KJV, but the "n" verse is in the Dead Sea Scrolls (verse
13b in NIV). Also there is much needed addition in I Samuel 10.

HOVIND STATEMENT 12. Warning Satan may be driving around in a UFO!

REPLY: There is no Bible verse that says Satan flies around in a
UFO.

HOVIND STATEMENT 13. Radiometric dating is wrong because the moon
rocks have different dates. See www.jpdawson.com
Carbon 14 is wrong because two bones from the same Mammoth date 22,000 and
40,000 years old.

REPLY: Different Moon rocks should have different dates since they
were formed at different times. The dark lava flows on the moon are much
younger in age. See information on radiometric
dating. Contamination can cause a false Carbon
14 date (See Creation/Evolution 30:1-17 Summer 1992).

HOVIND STATEMENT 14. Light is slowing down.

REPLY: So much for E=MC2. A change in this equation would
change the dynamics of the universe. There is no evidence that light is
slowing down. More
Information.

REPLY: Hovind showed so many pictures on "supposed dinosaurs"
that I thought I ought to find dozens of dinosaurs in the Delaware River.
Marine reptiles are not dinosaurs, but dont confuse Hovind with the
facts. I called the Creation
Science Museum. They said Carl Baugh would call me the next day which
he did on June 23, 1999. Carl Baugh said that it (the supposed small dinosaur
from Lake Erie) is undergoing DNA testing at a university, so they did not
want to announce anything about it until they can be sure it is not a hoax.
He thinks it is real, but not a plesiosaur. A CAT scan shows there is a
strange skull.

I then asked Carl Baugh about the supposed pterodactyls in New Guinea.
He says that there has been several expeditions there, with two dozen reports
of large flying creatures called "duwat" by the natives which
means "living demon." It supposedly has a tail, a crest, a 18
foot wing span, web feet with claws, and claws on their wings. They are
bioluminescent on their breast, and sometimes tail. The creature eats human
bodies in graves. There are pictures of the footprint, but no casts. There
are no pictures of the creature, no bones, no proof. He does not want to
put this on the Internet because this creature has not been confirmed which
is good, but Kent Hovind seems to use many of these as proofs. The natives
are probably describing a flying
fox bat or fruit bat. See missionary reports
for more information.

HOVINDS REPLY: I asked him about the yellow dinosaur with
a beard, and he said that is what someone said. I asked him if he investigated
any of these stories. He has not. He takes them at face value, and gives
me more phone numbers of people to call for proof.

REPLY: I told him he needed proof like the skeleton of the supposed
glow in the dark pterodactyl.

HOVIND'S RELPY: When I asked Hovind about his
IRS tax problems he said that he had no problems with the IRS because
he was suing them. The two IRS agents had no right or authority to seize
his property. He thinks Love offerings are not taxable, and this is none
of my business.

A Phone Call with Kent Hovind

I just got off the phone with Kent Hovind, Friday May 28, 1999. We talked
for over an hour before we were suddenly cut off. About two hours later
he called back saying we were cut off by a thunder storm. We talked shortly,
and then we politely ended our conversation. Here are some of the highlights
of our conversation.

He said that he had no problems with the IRS because he was suing them.
The two IRS agents had no right or authority to seize his property. He thinks
Love offerings are not taxable, and this is none of my business.

He still thinks B17 is the cure for cancer because people have been cured
from cancer after taking B17. Repeatedly, he used testimonies and peoples
phone numbers as proof positive. I told him that this was just like the
faith healers on TV. I told him he needs to use scientific journals, and
Time magazine is not a scientific journal (Time was the only
reference in his seminar that I attended).

I asked him about the yellow dinosaur with a beard, and he said that is
what someone said. I asked him if he investigated any of these stories.
He takes them at face value, and gives me more phone numbers of people to
call for proof. I told him he needed proof like the skeleton of the supposed
glow in the dark pterodactyl.

Kent Hovind said that the supposed plesiosaur is not is not a basking shark
because the testing showed that it was only a 97% match, and man and monkeys
DNA are 97% the same, and no one knows the DNA of a plesiosaur.

He said that someone told him that morning about www.darwindisproved.com
so he put it in his presentation, later that day he discovered it was a
hoax and removed it (I would think you would want to check out a web site
before recommending it to a large audience).

We argued about only using 10% of our brains, and I could see that I was
not getting anywhere.

I questioned some things on his web site like "unicorn" in the
Hebrew means "wild ox" but He insisted the KJV had the proper
translation. His web site also tells about the great pyramid that has the
gospel in stone like the 153 steps in the narrow way match the 153 fish
in John 21:11. When I questioned him he said he knew someone who went to
Egypt and knows this to be true.

I tried to explain the Hebrew in Genesis 1:5, so maybe he will take a second
look at it. He said that if he has time, he would look at my web site.

Lastly, we argued about the dinosaur tracks in the Paluxy River. I told
him that the president of our institute was there when they dug up a supposed
human footprint, he secretly made a cast of it, and took it to an expert
who said it was not a human foot print. As proof I gave him his phone number,
and then we politely ended our conservation.

Sincerely,
Stephen Meyers

Hovind's Coast to Coast Am Radio Broadcast with Host Mike Siegel

August 2-3, 2000

Hovind tells how ancient people lived 900 years. The ancient Sumerian King
List gives amazing reigns of 36,000 years, 28,800 years, etc. I do not think
they lived this long. I think scribes misunderstood the ancient sign U4
meaning year for "shar" meaning 3,600. See Noah's
Ark and the Ziusudra Epic. See also Did
the Ancients Live Longer? Teeth and bone analysis indicate short life
spans, not long.

Hovind states, "I don't know about the Sumerians particularly.
I know the Egyptians and the Babylonians, I guess that's the forerunner
to the Sumerians, they greatly exaggerated their history." I am
surprised that Hovind does not know about the Sumerians. Historians go far
past 15000 BC in history. Hovind needs to check out the latest history books.

The genealogies of the Bible can not give us accurate dates as Hovind believes.
"Son of" means descendant. For example, Jesus is called the "son
of David" yet 1,000 years separate them. There are gaps in the genealogies
as seen in Matthew's and Luke's genealogies of Jesus.

Hovind's and Siegel's information about the Great Pyramid and Sphinx are
way off base. See Gospel in the
Pyramids

There may have indeed been 30% more oxygen at the time of the dinosaurs,
but as Michael Siegel points out this indicates an evolutionary adaptation
of animals to a changing environment.

There is plenty of evidence for the Big Bang. With pictures from Hubble
we can peak into stellar nurseries and see stars forming. We can also see
stars exploding and dying. Below are stellar nurseries. See Hubble
Spies Brown Dwarfs in Nearby Stellar Nursery.

Hovind gives a number of Carbon 14 dates that are obviously wrong.
Living mollusk shells are going to date wrong because they are in water
with a different ratio of carbon 12/14 than in the atmosphere (Science
vol.141, 634, vol.224, 58). Scientists have learned that there are a number
of things you can not date accurately. At the beginning of the carbon 14
dating there were some problems with calibration, but now with tree ring
dating carbon 14 can be very accurate.

Daniel Wonderly states, "charcoal from partially burned wood is one
of the most reliable types of material for carbon-14 dating....The carbon
in charcoal is elemental, extremely stable, and therefore does not dissolve
or become chemically altered even during many millennia of burial. By contrast,
the carbon in bones and many other materials is chemically combined with
different elements, which sometimes makes dating difficult (IBRI
Research Report #44, 1996).

The dating of Dinosaur bones is also way off. One was of an Allosaurus
bone that was dug up by a team from Liberty University. Dr. Murray helped
out with the excavation. Dr. Murray prepared the bones for Liberty University.
Dr. Murray tried to explain to them that there was no organic carbon in
the bones. The bones were completely fossilized. All the original organic
material is replaced by other minerals. So what was tested was not the original
carbon in the bones. Dr. Murray prepares and preserves bones with gum Arabic.
I asked Hugh Miller about gum Arabic and he said he knew nothing about it.
They might have mistaken gum Arabic for collagen.

Ica Stones

Acambaro Figurines

To see more pictures see The
Dinosaur Figurines Of Acambaro, Mexico. Other scientists claim these
are frauds made locally for tourists. First of all there is great debate
about the authenticity of these artifacts. Mr. Charles DiPeso has claimed
them frauds in an article in American Antiquity (April 1953).

Secondly, this does not look like any known dinosaur. Among the artifacts
were teeth that Dr. George Gaylord Simpson identified as equus conversidans,
an extinct horse, not dinosaur. He states, "At first it seemed probable
to me that the reptiles in the collection, despite occasional startling
resemblances to dinosaurs, were inspired by the living reptiles of Middle
America, such as the iguana lizard, and this was the opinion of Professor
Romer of Harvard" (Mystery in Acambaro by Charles Hapgood, Kempton:
AUP, 2000 p.82).

Thirdly, ancient cultures made up all sorts of monsters like the seven
headed Leviathan. The Egyptians put all sorts of animal heads on a human
body. Wings are added to animals. Different parts of animals are mixed together
to form a new animal like the Sphinx.

Fourthly, some may have come from finding fossil dinosaurs bones, or more
likely Pleistocene mammal bones. There is an interesting book about this
entitled The First Fossil Hunters written by Adrienne Mayor.

Fifthly, Charles Hapgood, a professor of history and anthropology at Keene
State College of the University of New Hampshire, raises some important
points that he does not adequately answer. 1. "Never in the previous
history of archaeology have such vast numbers of artifacts been found in
a few acres of ground. 2. "There is no precedent for the almost perfect
preservation of so many delicate objects through burial in the earth."
3. The objects conform to no known culture." 4. "The absence of
patina, or an accumulation of earth salts on most of the objects is inexplicable"
(Mystery in Acambaro by Charles Hapgood, Kempton: AUP, 2000 p.89).

The Great Debate

Hugh Ross vs. Kent Hovind
How old is the Earth?

A critique of this debate by Dr. Stephen Meyers

The John Ankerberg Show invited Dr. Hugh Ross and Dr. Kent Hovind to debate.
Tapes of it are for sale at his site or at www.reasons.org
(Hugh Ross's web site).

Although I might agree with some of the points both Ross and Hovind made,
I think that both are fundamentally wrong.

Both Ross and Hovind pour their world view back into the verses of Genesis
One that ancient Hebrew readers would never have understood as the meaning
of this Genesis text.

Hugh Ross pours the "Big Bang" with millions of years into Genesis
One. Although I agree with his old earth point of view this is not what
ancient readers would have believed from the text of Genesis.

Kent Hovind pours his view of a water canopy surrounding the earth before
Noah's flood which ancient readers would not have believed.

Both Ross and Hovind see Genesis 1:1 as an ex nihilo creation of God.

How would ancient Hebrew readers understood Genesis One?

Genesis 1:1-Summary Statement

Genesis 1:1 is most likely a summary statement of what happened in the
first chapter of Genesis. There is no ex niliho creation in this
verse. No creation of the heavens or the earth. No creation of matter. Note
the creation of the heavens is not until day 2 and dry land does not appear
until day 3. Ancient readers would not have read a "Big Bang"
into this verse, nor just the creation of matter. The idea of ex nihilo
creation did not occur until the time of the early church. Genesis 1:1
is just a summary statement for this text.

Genesis 1:2- The Pre-Creation State

The second verse describes the condition of the earth before God begins
creating. This is similar to Genesis Two and ancient creation stories. The
earth is described as a barren wasteland and devoid of life. A wind which
is seen as the breath or Spirit of God blows over the watery deep.

Genesis 1:3-5 - Day One

Light is the first thing created on the first day of creation. The picture
described in Genesis 1:3-5 is the dawning of creation like the dawning of
a new day. In the Ancient Near East (ANE) and the Bible there is a difference
between daylight and direct sun light. Daylight occurs an hour or two before
the sun rises, and continues for an hour after sunset. In this pre-scientific
age daylight was not the result of the sun. The light of dawn was seen as
separate and distinct from the light of the sun. This is not describing
a Big Bang as Ross believes.

Creation in the ancient world was not ex nihilo. It was one of separating
and naming things. God commands and it is carried out just like the command
of a king.

There are three different ways "yom" (day) is used in
Genesis 1:1-2:4. It can mean 12 hours, 24 hours, or six days. "Yom"
can also mean a certain period of time, but ancient readers would not have
understand billions of years for the six days of creation as Ross believes.

Genesis 1:6-8 - Day Two - The Firmament

The firmament was conceived as a solid vaulted structure that held up the
heavenly ocean (Job 37:18). Gates or windows would open up to let rain out
(Genesis 7:11, 8:2). There are pillars (mountains) that hold up heaven (Job
26:11). The heavens are said to be stretched out like a tent over the earth
and the watery abyss (Isaiah 40:22, Job 26:7).

The firmament is not a water canopy as Hovind claims, nor is it just
the atmosphere as Ross claims. It was seen as a solid structure by ancient
readers. By New Testament times the firmament was seen as crystalline or
frozen ice.

Genesis 1:9-13 - Day Three - Sea, land, and plants

Babylonian Map of the World

The earth is circular, surrounded by a circular ocean (drawing).

All the waters under the firmament are collected together into one place.
This seems to indicate there was one sea which surrounded one continent.
Both the sea and the earth were considered circular, but not spherical (Job
26:10; Isaiah 40:22; see the Babylonian
Map of the World). The earth is stretched out over the deep and pillars
hold it up (Job 26:7; Isaiah 42:5, 44:24; I Samuel 2:8). The earth is commanded
to sprout forth all sorts of vegetation. There is no direct creation of
plants by God.

Genesis 1:14-19 - Day Four - Sun, Moon, and Stars

This seems to be a polemic against the ANE view that the sun, moon, and
stars were gods. In Genesis they are mere creations under Gods control.
Planets were called "wandering stars" (Jude 13). Meteorites and
sometimes comets were called "falling stars."

I do not think that ancient readers would have understood that on
day four the atmosphere cleared so one could see the sun, moon, and stars
as Ross claims.

Hovind claims that the laws of entropy began when Adam fell which he states
was 100 years after creation. How can the Sun and stars burn without the
laws of entropy? They can not!

Genesis 1:20-23 - Day Five - Birds, and Fish

On day five the fish and birds are created. In the ANE fish and birds where
associated together because they are seen together near water and marshes.
They may of thought that everything that lives in or near water, comes from
water. Great flocks of birds are seen in and near water and marshes.

Genesis 1:24-31 - Day Six - Animals and Man

The earth is commanded to bring forth all sorts of animals. This is not
ex nihilo creation. It would be best to translate "after their
kind" as meaning "all sort of." Ancient readers would not
have equated "kind" with "species." Behemoth was not
a dinosaur as Hovind claims (see Behemoth).

There are three different ways "adam" is used in Genesis. "Adam"
can just mean the generic term for mankind in general, or male in particular.
In Genesis 1:27 the term "Adam" includes both male and female
referring to all humanity. In Genesis Two "Adam" refers to a male
in contrast to a female. Finally there is the historical person named "Adam."
The historical Adam may be the same man named "Allum" the first
king in the Sumerian King List who lived before the great flood. He was
the first king of Eridu which may be Biblical Eden. In the ANE kings were
considered to be the "image of god" even the very "son of
god." It seems the Hebrews have democratized the "image of God"
to refer to all mankind, and not just to the king rule over creation. Every
plant and tree is given to man for food. There seems to be an ancient tradition
that man and animals were herbivorous.

Genesis 2:1-4a - Day Seven - The Sabbath

The origin of the Sabbath is probably from the 6&7 day cycle of the
phases of the moon each month. Probably during the captivity there was no
one to watch for the phrases on the moon so it became disconnected from
the lunar cycle. Later the sun, moon, and the planets were connected to
the different days of the week which we still have today. Only the new moon
and the full moon are mentioned in the OT.

Conclusions

Both Hugh Ross and Kent Hovind are trying to pour their world view of creation
back into Genesis One that the original readers would never have understood.

Both assume the Bible is scientifically accurate on its account of creation.
I contend that the Bible was not meant to be scientifically accurate textbook.
According to 2 Timothy 3:16 scripture is inspired by God in the areas of
faith and practice, not in the areas of astronomy, geology, and biology.
Genesis One is more like a polemic poem against the surrounding heathen
polytheism, and not a scientific text.